Can we get the definitive head to head comparo on these? Sure, a video would be great but a written run down of how these are similar, where they differ etc would be awesome, too. Thanks!!
ET90 vs Reaper HP
Error message
Notice: unserialize(): Error at offset 0 of 22 bytes in variable_initialize() (line 1202 of /home/wgsusa/public_html/includes/bootstrap.inc). 11/02/2017 10:42am
Yea, I'm beginning to do a new series of vids ... and they will be much higher quality than the ones I did back in the Sone-age of YouTube!
That'll be a great one to do as I've not done it yet ... and those two DO sound a lot alike.
"those two DO sound a lot alike" was kinda my determination after reading so many posts on them, they seem to get recommended for similar applications. Hence why I'm asking the Q.
Itll be really good to see what the differences truly are and what's best for what purpose.
Where are we on this?
If Vaughn doesn't mind, I believe I have an insight into the differences between the ET90 and Reaper HP based on some comparative spectral analysis I've done. The ET90 is essentially an ET65 with slightly stronger low end & upper-mids, and should be a bit tighter/less-resonant due to stronger magnetic damping. They both have a ~4.7kHz "decrisping" dip with a narrow peak above it at ~5.5kHz which adds a nice sparkle. The stronger ~4kHz region of the ET90 gives it more presence that may be hard to reduce without loosing a lot of ~5.5kHz detail. Amp tone stack Treble generally adjusts ~2kHz+ pretty evenly. So, you can soften the high end with less Treble, but it may then sound a bit muted in the 4~6kHz range. Some players also find the ET65 lacking definition because the 2-2.5kHz range is less hyped than classic Celestions or the newer V30. The ET90 may not have any more 2~2.5kHz clarity, but it might be considered a better NuMetal or Country speaker due to more ~4kHz presence. I 'd say it does a Fendery amp sounds quite well.
The Reaper HP should have stronger 4~6kHz than the ET90 for a more crisp, yet rounded "reedy" sound lending overdriven Marshallesk amps a Clarinet or Soprano Sax quality I don't think the ET90 or ET65 can do. It strikes me as less metallic than the ET90 and more crisp than the ET65. I'd say it's essentially a slightly less brittle, warmer and tighter G12H-75Hz Heritage -- making it more versatile and with better warmth and punch in an open-back cab. I suspect a closed 2x12" of the HP's might sound more like a 4x12" of G12H-75Hz. You can reduce the bright crispness by turning the amp Treble down and it won't sound as muted as the ET90. The Reaper HP is also slightly less piercing due to the upper-mid ~3.5kHz peak being less pronounced, rounder, and centered a tad higher than in the ET65. Closer to 3kHz is the "ice pick" zone. It might be about the same in the ET90. That's worth finding out. It's also worth knowing how rough sounding it might get at 30+ Watts. The cone was originally designed for 30W max, so it might get a bit wild even if it can take it. That could be really cool or a bit disappointing if you want a very loud clean sound. The ET90 cone probably breaks up less.
I'd probably pick the Reaper HP between the two for a Marshall type amp and then keep the Treble down with the Presence up and/or Brightness on for a cleaner and more dynamic 3kHz+, unless you specifically want the more metallic ET90 for Metal, Country, Punk, etc, and don't want the reedy quality of the Reaper HP. The Reapers might sound a bit hollow in a Fender type amp, but people have been known to use them to good affect. I believe the woody/reedy HP can cover Jazz well in a Fendery amp with the right tone stack settings. Treble down, Midrange way up and maybe the Bright switch on.
Listen to this comparison Vaughn did of the ET90 and the standard Reaper. The HP should be just a bit warmer and tighter with a smidgen more ~6kHz detail due to better magnetic damping: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Az9BG21ZzHw&feature=youtu.be